Reply to “Comment on ‘Ferromagnetic film on a superconducting substrate’ ”
L. N. Bulaevskii, E. M. Chudnovsky, M. Daumens
DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.136502 · Physical Review B
Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval
Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.
Abstract
The energy of the magnetic field has been overestimated in our original paper but the paper did not say that domains could shrink drastically due to the substrate. The maximal shrinkage of domains is by 18.35%, which is sufficiently large to be easily observed in experiment.
Similar papers
Comment on “Ferromagnetic film on a superconducting substrate”
similarity 0.91E. B. Sonin
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Comment on "Ferromagnetic film on a superconducting substrate"
similarity 0.85E. B. Sonin · 2001 · arXiv:cond-mat/0102102
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Reply to "Comment on "Domain Structure in a Superconducting Ferromagnet""
similarity 0.85M. Faure & A. I. Buzdin · 2005 · arXiv:cond-mat/0511517
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Is There a Ferromagnet to Ferromagnetic s-Wave Superconductor Phase Transition?
similarity 0.84Yuan Zhou et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Ferromagnetic Film on a Superconducting Substrate
similarity 0.84L. N. Bulaevskii & E. M. Chudnovsky · 2000 · arXiv:cond-mat/0007159
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Proximity effects in superconductor-ferromagnet heterostructures
similarity 0.83A. I. Buzdin · 2005 · arXiv:cond-mat/0505583
Source status unknown — claims are unverified